Posts Tagged ‘corruption’

Secrets

Thursday, October 27th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, to argue national defense is sufficient cause for a secret, is to argue suicide is necessary for cancer prevention. After all, there is not one secret the US or any other government has, that is not known by other governments, so in reality, when government classifies something secret, they are merely keeping it from citizens, not foreign governments, so, to claim a thing needs to be secret for national security is absurd. The only people who are unable to know what our governments are doing are the people themselves. Look at the “secrets” wikileaks has released, none of them put a single American in jeopardy, the only things threatened are the elite’s machinations. Snowden’s release of information shows how our government violates our Constitution and that is why he is under indictment. In a limited republic that guarantees liberty for it’s citizens, everything government does would be available for any citizen to see. The only thing that grows in darkness is corruption and we have more than a sufficient supply of that.

If government only did what it is supposed to, protect people and property from those who would abuse or abscond, is the only legitimate role of government…. In other words, the police and army. Other things that can be argued are right roles of government are, printing money, building roads and infrastructure, settling disputes between citizens, setting standards and defining governmental boarders. These other roles however, have often been done by citizens themselves, usually better and cheaper. When government sticks to it’s legitimate role it need not maintain thousands of bureaucrats administering government. The more illegitimate roles government takes up… the more things it decides need to be secret. It is the pervasive and ever growing secret state that is a sign that government has breached it’s banks and is flooding the country with red tape and taxes.

When government takes on clearly illegitimate roles like “helping” American industry, the need for secrets grows. As our government gets in bed with tyrants the need for secrets grows, the more illegal activities our government engages in, the more they need to keep secrets, the more powerful government grows the more need for secrets, the more controlling it becomes the more it needs its secrets and the more government monitors the people the more it needs to hide what it is doing. All from the people, not other governments, who have spies to insure they know all there is to know about our government’s secrets, but the citizens whom the government is supposed to serve live in darkness. So the people government is keeping secrets from are the people themselves.

Why keep secrets from citizens? Because government knows what it is doing is wrong. Instead of protecting people’s Rights, lives and property, government has become the biggest threat to our lives, Rights and property. The modern government has as it’s core philosophy, everything within it’s boundaries are the government’s property, the land, houses, cars, factories, and even the people themselves. That which we are allowed to keep is out of government’s beneficence. This is made clear whenever taxes are brought up. The argument is based on the premise all income belongs to government. When that is your mindset, you have to keep it secret from the people you consider your slaves, else they might get uppity.

Of course there will always need to be spies. They are an arm of the army and as such help government meet it’s core role of protecting the people. The amount of secrets however exceeds mere spy craft by orders of magnitude. Plus, why keep the findings of spies on our enemies, secret? Shaming enemy nations should be a legitimate role of spies. Sadly, governments are far more concerned about spying on their own citizens than on potential invading armies. The need for secrets is a sure sign government is grown beyond it’s legitimate role. Everything government does should be freely available to any citizen that asks for it. The Freedom of Information act is a first step but falls short. Every legislators office should have a camera and microphone installed that stream to the internet, the President’s office should be monitored the same way, judges chambers should be recorded and the recording released to the public the day that judge casts his or her decision. Every trade deal should be open to anyone to see, every regulation should be read by the people, every document created by government using tax dollars should be available to the people who paid those taxes, not one aspect of government should be hidden from the people who government is supposed to serve. The more secrets a government has, the more it needs them, because that government is doing something it is not supposed to.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Voting Dead…

Thursday, September 29th, 2016

 

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the one thing that gives any governmental unit true authority… is the consent of the people, absent that consent, government has no real authority and the power it wields is mere usurpation. The way government gets the consent of the people is by the electoral process. If that electoral process is undermined, whether the people know it or not, consent is not given. Therefore, any government, or faction that seeks to undermine the democratic process, is unjustly assuming power. Moreover, anyone who seeks to govern without the consent of the governed, especially where that consent is artificially created, is engaging in the most heinous kind of crime. Crime that is far worse than stealing, abuse and even murder, because the very lives, liberty and property of everyone is at risk. In other words… The single crime from which tyranny flows in the modern world, is vote fraud.

Vote fraud usually comes from hubris and presumption. Those who engage in vote fraud have the hubris to fool themselves into believing their cause is the most just and presumption in they presume to know what is best for everyone else. They see their own arguments close at hand while they see the arguments of others at a distance, crediting themselves, as we all do, with the most enlightened wisdom, they willingly pervert the electoral process to benefit their preferred faction… themselves. Hubris and presumption are the natural result of misplaced pride.

Some people believe themselves to be smarter, wiser and more caring than everyone else, this is especially true of people with college degrees. They consider themselves smarter than everyone else because they went to college. If they find they are incapable of holding a job, it cannot be because of any deficiency in themselves, the system must be wrong, after all, they are smarter than the rest of us who do have jobs. So they gravitate to socialism, with themselves as the rightful leaders, in this violence is acceptable but if that isn’t viable, vote fraud becomes thinkable. Since they see themselves as more deserving and caring than everyone else, they appoint themselves as the master who forces all those other uncaring louts to provide for the less fortunate. If they personally benefit, what is the harm, aren’t they the most deserving anyway?

People have an amazing ability to justify their actions in their own minds. Psychologists call this cognitive dissonance. If a person treats you badly, even if by accident, their opinion of you goes down… they like you less. That is because since they treated you badly, in their mind’s eye, either they are bad for treating a good person badly, else you are bad and deserve it. Since no one believes themselves bad the fall back is always that you are bad. This concept can be applied to vote fraud, in that someone who believes their cause just and themselves wise, engages in vote fraud, they must believe others who seek free and fair elections are bad people, otherwise the fraudster is bad, plus those others don’t see what they see or care like they care. Even the voters themselves are seen as less than human to people who manipulate the vote through fraud. Otherwise, those who pervert the electoral process would be bad, and cognitive dissonance forbids that.

This is why efforts to stem vote fraud are met with such vehemence, vitriol and violence. Anything that limits their ability to pervert democracy to their own ends cannot be allowed to stand. Anyone who wants free and fair elections must be personally destroyed else society might not go the way the self appointed masters think it should. Moreover, people who seek the honest consent of the governed must be ignorant, since fraudsters are so much smarter, wiser and more caring than the hoi polloi. You can reliably tell who is in favor of vote fraud by how they react to efforts to stem it. Their silence at obvious vote fraud screams they consider the people fools to be manipulated and trod underfoot. When a district votes 100% for one candidate, and turnout is 120% of the registered voters, or dead people have come back to life simply to cast a ballot, clearly either the laws of physics has been upended, or vote fraud on a large scale has taken place. Those who find identification to vote obnoxious are those who seek to pervert democracy to their own ends. Of all the crimes, vote fraud has the potential to result in human suffering far greater than even murder, and should be treated as such.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Evil is Evil, No Matter Who or How Many Do It…

Thursday, September 22nd, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if an action is wrong for an individual, it is wrong for a group. Blame cannot be diluted, as salt is diluted in water, blame fits all equally. Evil is evil no matter who does it or how many are involved. A robbery is made no less of a sin, if ten people are involved than if a lone gunman in an alley robs you, it is still a sin and the blame is not diluted by there being ten involved, each is as to blame as a single thug. This is an important concept for people to understand since the dilution of blame is a paramount theory of government. Often this dilution of blame is such that it allows ever greater evils to be done in the name of goodness, which is of course absurdity.

If a person wants his neighbor’s land, so he storms that neighbors house killing the father and enslaving his family, obviously an evil has been done. What of a whole neighborhood lusts after the land of someone and they storm her house taking her land and killing her? Is it any less evil? What if a million people desire someone’s property, kill them and take it, is it any less evil, are the individuals any less culpable? No, they are all equally culpable and don’t share the blame, diluting it, they are all as culpable as if one person does it. No matter if the thing stolen is real property or chattel, an evil has been committed, and everyone involved shares in the blame equally, in the same measure as a lone wolf.

What if a person is detestable in his philosophy, espousing a point of view another cannot stand, so that other cuts out the first person’s tongue, has an evil been done? What if a hundred people don’t like what the first person says, would it be okay then to stop his speaking by force? What if a billion people call for it… is it any less evil? No matter the number of people involved the crime is the same, the blame is the same, and everyone involved has committed an evil. What about if someone is doing something detestable but is harming no one else? Can a lone woman take offense and lock that man in her basement for a few years? Would that be okay? What if a dozen people get together and in their indignation capture him and lock him in a dungeon for a decade, for his own good, would it be a good thing then? What if a million are offended?

A crime is a crime no matter who does it. What if a king decides he only likes women with blue eyes, would it be acceptable for him to order all women with brown or green eyes executed? Does the king’s pleasure overwhelm the right to life of those women? What about if he preferred brown eyes… would it be okay then? Would it be a good thing if a king ordered a squad of armed men to go door to door taking every carrot the people had grown? Perhaps our theoretical king could violate his own edicts, would it be acceptable for him, but not anyone else? What if that king were loved by the people, would that make it okay? No it wouldn’t. A person’s title, occupation or status does not give her the right to visit evil on another, no matter the difference in the adoration of the masses.

In the example of the king ordering a squad to visit evil on someone else, is the king less culpable because he didn’t actually commit the crime himself, what about the squad of men, are they less to blame for their actions because they were simply following orders? Do you think God will hold a death camp guard blameless because he was following orders? Will God hold the person ordering the sin blameless because she didn’t actually commit the sin herself? Maybe a king could change what is good and what is evil by edict? Could a king, beloved by the people, change morality, let’s say changing murder from a sin to a virtue? Is that in the power of any man, king or not?

That which is evil, is evil, no matter who does it, why it is done or how many people do it. Sadly this concept is lost on the lion’s share of humanity. People see a single evil and call it evil, but when they see a million evils, they call it a good. This doesn’t follow. The ancient Chinese utilitarian philosopher, Mo Ti said, “Take the case of a man who when shown a few black dots calls them black, but when shown a large number of black objects calls them white. He would have to admit his eyesight was in disorder and that he did not know the difference between black and white.” This sums up what I am saying, everyone knows a single evil like theft, is evil, but many see theft by the multitude as a good, especially if it benefit them. They would have to admit their moral compass is off by many degrees… Just because an evil is done by someone who claims to represent the many, doesn’t make it a good, it simply involves the many in the sin.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Debating a Crypto Marxist

Thursday, September 1st, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the way you can reliably tell when a progressive knows he or she has lost a debate, is when they call you a hater. Since progressives know debate is not to change the mind of the opposition, but the spectators, they cannot allow a libertarian to win any debate, so once their empty rhetoric has failed they go nuclear and slander the opponent, to delegitimize the libertarian’s argument. By libertarian, I mean anyone who believes in limited government, like a conservative, and so I use the inclusive term libertarian. Of course slander is an underhanded way to win an argument and is a transparent ploy to anyone who knows the rules of debate, but since most spectators know nothing of logical fallacies, that tactic has worked wonders for Marxists, socialists and progressives for over a century. So, when a progressive calls you a hater, racist, bigot, etc… you can rest assured you have won the debate, by facts and argument, but are still at risk of loosing it by a logical fallacy. That is why it is important to point out the logical fallacy instead of getting mad.

Politics is based on debate. People discussing the merits of this or that policy, position of program is the best way for a group to decide what is the right course of action. Without debate the democratic element of any government becomes impossible. An ignorant people cannot make reasoned decisions. The ancient Greeks had open and lively debates in the Pnyx. Smart as well as foolish decisions were decided there. The disaster of the attack on Sicily was decided there, as well as the fortunate history changing judgment, to support the Spartans at Thermopylae. Both were debated by the Athenians and voted on by them, based on the result of the debate, but in one debate we see calamity and the other a blessing on humanity. The difference was the debate.

The rules of debate as well as logical fallacies should be taught in every school on Earth. Sadly, that is in direct opposition to the power of the political elite, and so those important lessons are eschewed for politically correct knowledge, like how to put a condom on a cucumber. Teaching debate and logic would undermine the ability of those who favor arbitrary rule in any of it’s manifestations and names. The power of slander would be severely curtailed by such teaching and so only in private schools is debate and logic really taught. Even colleges and universities pervert the teaching of logic and debate, since they have long abandoned their fundamental purpose, to be open minded and forward the goal of reason. Debate a recent graduate of a university, and you will quickly realize the little person is an automaton, spewing rhetoric she has been programmed with. Once you win the debate you will be painted as a hater.

Of course slander is a logical fallacy… but why? If someone is really evil how can you agree with anything they say? Well, if Adolph Hitler came in soaking wet and tells you it is raining outside, does that mean it cannot be raining, since Hitler is evil? What if Stalin says the sky is blue, does that mean the sky is actually green? Of course it’s not. Bias on the other hand can undermine a debaters position. When Phillip Morris cited paid for “scientific research” proving smoking is good for you, that turned out to be patently untrue, it was an example of bias undermining a position. In a similar vein, when someone who stands to gain if people opt for their position, their argument should be given extra scrutiny. Like for example, a scientist who has millions of dollars of government money at risk, claims man made climate change is happening, especially when they try to shut down debate. It is only logical to view their argument with a bit more care. This is especially true when one side has made predictions based on their theories that have not proven accurate. The more inaccurate predictions the less credence we can give them.

If we want our children to live in a world that is prosperous, healthy, harmonious and safe, it is up to us to understand the rules of debate and the logical fallacies that make people reach a faulty conclusion. Steel yourself to the fat that whenever you debate a progressive they will not debate fairly or logically. All Marxists, even crypto Marxists like progressives, are ideologues, they care nothing for reality, only their political ideals. To them, and sadly, to most audiences as well, facts, historical examples and a finely crafted argument means nothing, emotion is paramount. So, to win a debate with any crypto Marxist you must point out, once they slander you, that their slander is proof they have lost the argument… and they know it. Then laugh heartily at them rather then get defensive. Make the progressive a laughing stock and you have won the debate. Use their logical fallacy against them and sooner or later they will drop that tactic. When you are called a hater, simply say, “How do you know a progressive has lost an argument? They call you a hater…”

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Human Rights and Progressivism

Monday, July 18th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… progressives have never seen a human Right they don’t despise and want to get rid of. Their rhetoric and actions prove this. From their zealous attacks on the right of self defense, to their undermining of the freedom of religion, progressives show their absolute antipathy to human rights of every stripe. In their zealous crusade to rid government of the burden of having to labor under the odium of the people’s individual rights, progressives have rolled back the advancement of philosophy, humanity and government, to a time well before the Enlightenment. Progressives are only too happy to use human rights to destroy human rights however. They pick and choose who gets rights and who doesn’t, in an effort to undermine and corrode basic natural law, which is the font of all human rights. Progressives are never happier than when they are overseeing a genocide which makes them the antithesis of human hearted, making Progressivism and all progressives, diabolical.

All human rights come from natural law. Before governments were invented all human beings were created equal, had innate rights like, the right to self defense, the right to privacy, the right to own the fruits of their labor, the right to own property both personal and real as well as, the right to think and believe as each chooses. Government and powerful men stole those human rights by the sword. People were enslaved by those powerful men, who needed an excuse for their evil, so they came up with the theory of arbitrary rule. Once that had been thoroughly debunked, the powerful changed it to the rights of kings, today that philosophy has been renamed social justice. All in an attempt to destroy human rights to justify people being exploited as slaves. Which of course is the direct opposite of natural rights, or as Socrates called it, justice.

The right of self defense is their most important bugaboo. Progressives and indeed everyone who has a penchant for tyranny loathes the right to self defense. How can you enslave a person who is capable and willing to defend themselves and their children from your evil? The basic human right to self defense is the first right from which all others flow, for if one has no right to defend him or herself from the usurpations of a monster, than all other rights become null and void. Everywhere and every time human beings have been denied their basic human right of self defense, it has resulted in slavery, suffering and death, there are no historical examples where this is not true. From ancient China to the modern Syria masters had arms and slaves were disarmed. Before a person can be enslaved they must be disarmed whether by force or trickery. Now they are using trickery but soon progressives will become anxious and will resort to violence… as they always have.

Today progressive make a compelling case to get rid of basic human rights. They seek to control thought, whether by hate crimes or political correctness, progressives seek to control not only what we do, but what we think as well. The right to freedom of religion has been perverted to separation of church and state, which actually means the elevation of atheism, as the state religion. The right to privacy doesn’t exist in a surveillance state, where your every move is recorded and stored in a government data bank, for use against you when the elite see fit. Moreover, how can anyone argue, with a straight face, that we are protected in our personal papers and effects when government can hack into our phones, computers and phone conversations without warrant? Instead of “interpreting” our Constitution, as it was written and intended, progressives claim it is a “living breathing document,” which means they get to change it’s meaning arbitrarily, eviscerating the protections our Constitution is supposed to provide. What is most distressing is that a huge number of people fall for such chicanery.

Justice is not arbitrary rule no matter what they call it, freedom is never submission and humanity cannot be imposed by the state’s monopoly on violence. Our basic human rights come from God or nature but not and never government. Government is the opposite of freedom. While in a state of nature you can go out and kill a deer to feed your family, grow whatever crop you want to fill your children’s bellies, worship whatever deity you please, protect your family and self from thieves and murderers with violence if necessary, build a home, and think whatever you want, progressives always seeks to take these rights away. If you need permission from government… they have taken away your right to do it.

That progressives loathe and despise human rights is an open secret. Their every action serves to undermine human rights and humanity itself in the process… all in the name of “equality.” Progressive’s, socialist’s and Marxist’s version of equality, however, is where some people are more equal than others, to borrow a phrase. While they zealously defend their own “right” to control our thoughts, actions and religious beliefs, arbitrarily as in the rights of kings, they actively destroy those of everyone else. The quiet of Woodrow Wilson when the Armenians were being exterminated, FDR’s silence as Jews were being slaughtered on an industrial scale, and now Obama’s defense of those massacring Christians in their original lands, shows progressives, socialists and Marxists passion for genocide. The master has every right while the slave has not even the right to life. They hold us to every word of their law, constitutional or not, while openly arguing law doesn’t apply to them. Listen to what they say, consider what the outcome of their argument will be… exercise your basic human right to think, before it is taken away.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Justice, Honor and Arbitrary Rule.

Thursday, July 7th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the mask has come off, we in the US now officially live under arbitrary rule and our leaders have no honor whatsoever. The fact Hillary Clinton has not, and will not be indicted for destroying evidence, keeping top secret information on an unsecured server, using a personal email for government business and/or lying under oath to congress, is proof positive we live under arbitrary rule. If anyone with less political power did one of those things they would be in jail and everyone knows it. That is an undeniable fact. The US has become, no longer a constitutional republic, but a banana republic. That a member of the elite can get away with multiple infringements of federal laws, without consequences, consequences that you or I would face, shows there is a double standard at work that is as pernicious as it is destructive. Moreover, recent news articles have shown that the rest of us no longer have the protections of law, or our Constitutional rights. Just as Rome was no longer a republic after Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the US is no longer a republic since the elite have the audacity to rub our noses in the fact they are above the law, and we are below it’s protections.

There is no true rule of law whatsoever the world over. This is not just happening in the US but is a world wide phenomenon. Human history is nothing but a story of the elite holding the people to laws they will not hold themselves to. The US was different, for a speck of time, because the US had the rule of law. True, the elite held themselves to it by their honor… but at least they did. Since FDR broke the unwritten rule that a President only run for two terms, our elite have increasingly lost all honor, and have disgraced themselves in every way possible. It is a quality of a civilized person to hold others to a lower standard then one does him or herself. To hold others to a higher standard then oneself, shows a lack of character, moral indifference and conniving which is on full display in the Hillary Clinton case.

Throughout history the wise have opined about the need for honor among the rulers of a society. When the rulers have no honor they will resort to every evil known to Man. History shows this to be true but goes further. In a society where the elite have no honor the people quickly loose their honor. Confucius said it first, (at least as far as I know), the people follow their leaders into corruption or virtue. In a nation where the leaders have no honor, the people will have no honor, where the people have no honor crime, chaos and beggary are rife. Economies grow in serenity and collapse in chaos, wealth flourishes in the absence of crime but erodes like sand when crime is rampant and where the economy is collapsing and wealth is being destroyed, poverty becomes the norm. All because the leaders have no honor.

The question of whether justice or arbitrary rule is best was considered in Plato’s book, The Republic. In it, Socrates argued for justice, while Thrasymachus the sophist argued for arbitrary rule. Thrasymachus claimed the great men, (those with political power, intelligence, wealth and ambition), should not follow the law, only appear to do so… law is only to make the hoi polloi believe there is justice to facilitate the control of the people and trick them into being obedient. Socrates made the argument justice in and of itself is a good. Justice is both a good that we do because it is good and a useful good as well. By allowing arbitrary rule to come back into fashion we become the dupes of the “great men.” Do you want the elite to exploit law to enrich themselves, amass political power over us and eventually tyrannize us? Or do you agree with Socrates that justice is a good in and of itself, one that is useful in creating a peaceful, wealthy and safe society?

Why would the people follow laws even those who write them don’t? Every one of us is a hypocrisy detector and hypocrisy is the surest way to make people despise the law. As a lack of honor flows from the top down a society will increasingly only follow laws by force and threat. Whenever they believe they can get away with breaking a law they will. Once dishonor reaches the lowest rung of a society no amount of punishment will suffice. People will not be not safe in their own homes, business cannot be conducted, children are at risk, people’s oaths are meaningless and every chance meeting becomes a danger. Clearly, to allow the leaders of a country to become utterly corrupt, dishonorable, conniving and lustful for power, can only lead to human suffering on a national scale.

One way to tell how dishonorable your leaders are is to look around with open eyes. Do people need bars on their windows, are all children safe on the streets, can you look at a passerby in the eye, is poverty rampant? Corrupt leaders will claim all this is due to worthless, lazy and ignorant people, but will never look in a mirror. The Duke of Lu asked Confucius one day, how he could get the people to stop lusting after other men’s wives, stealing and murder. Confucius said, the duke could lead by example and stop doing those things himself. Shortly after that Confucius and his disciples had to flee Lu state in fear of their lives. Let the scales drop from your eyes and really see.

So you see, this is not a matter of hate of an individual or gotcha politics, it is a matter of justice and human suffering. If we allow our noses to be rubbed in the elite’s corruption, we have given our consent to the elite to be even less honorable, in doing so we sentence our children and grand children to a life of poverty, fear and tyranny. Just because you like a politician, is no reason to allow them to get away with blatantly breaking laws, laws you or I would be severely punished for. Such actions are those of children, sycophants and imbeciles. Say nothing, do nothing, and the US will join the ranks of other failed experiments in human governance like Rome, Athens, Sparta, etc… with the same catastrophic results, human suffering on a grand scale. To do nothing is to abet a crime against humanity, to do something, even if it is small and of little consequence, is to make a stand against corruption. The choice is yours, lay down and let the elite walk over you… or stand and push back. It may be too late to have an effect, since we have allowed our leaders to be villains for so long, but maybe not. Regardless, do you want to be hated by your own grandchildren for your lack of back bone, or be a champion for liberty, prosperity and equality?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Pendulum Between Socialism and Capitalism

Thursday, June 16th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, there is a political pendulum that swings continually back and forth between socialism and capitalism, that pendulum is shown most clearly in the third world but is also apparent in the West as well. That political pendulum is driven by public opinion on the merits of both. Once a nation becomes relatively wealthy via capitalism there is always a movement to change to a socialist economy. Once the cancer of spreads sufficient, socialists are elected and begin to enact socialist policies. Once those policies are implemented… graft, corruption, poverty and outright famine take hold in a once wealthy country. The socialists however will not allow capitalists to get elected and wield power, so to change back to a market system there requires either a revolution, or criminal trials for the socialist elite. Once the government is under the control of capitalist, or to be more precise, politicians who favor the free market and liberty it provides, the economy becomes healthy again and the standard of living rebounds. The economy never achieves it’s former highs but the rampant corruption is dealt with, the suppression of economic activity subsides and some level of liberty is restored. Once the people become comfortable again, they vote socialists back in, and the cycle starts again.

Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Zimbabwe among others are perfect examples of this in action. In Argentina the profoundly corrupt socialists are facing criminal trials for their naked corruption. Politicians who favor free markets and liberty are back in charge, but only until they fix the economy and government, once they are fixed the people will again vote in socialists, as has happened over and over in Argentina. Venezuela is almost to the point of tossing out the socialists because they are at the bottom of the economic cycle. Basic needs cannot be met and poverty is as crushing as it is rampant. All in a nation setting on an ocean of oil. Hugo Chavez and his Bolivarian revolution has taken a relatively wealthy south American nation to absolute destitution. If he were still alive there would be executions in the streets of pro free market politicians. Rest assured however, the moment the free market repairs the economy and the corruption is rooted out of government, the people will again turn to socialism.

The US has just embarked on the socialist experiment. So far under Barak Obama it has been an utter failure. The media that calls itself unbiased is doing it’s job, as ordered by Obama, to protect him and forward the agenda. They have been good little toadies. Reporting on the economy is always rosy, despite the fact that interest rates have been held at an absurd level the entire span of Obama’s regime, US standing in the world has collapsed, terrorism has gone from an inconvenience to an existential threat and our debt to GDP ratio has never been higher, even during WWII. US manufacturing has seen 9 straight months of decline, a result not seen in over 100 years, (since Woodrow Wilson). Without recession. In fact by many metrics we have been in recession for years… but recession only happens when we are told by the elite we are in recession. The US is being overrun by people who come here illegally, have no intention of assimilating and pose a perpetual threat to the citizens. By every measure the US has dramatically declined under Obama’s march to socialism. Like an alcoholic however, the decline is ignored until we hit rock bottom, like one of Argentina’s many bouts with hyper inflation that gutted the middle class over and over.

This cycle is driven by human nature. People want to be comfortable and we want that comfort easy. It is all too easy to see the shortcomings of socialism when it has obliterated wealth, created famine and steeped the government in corruption, but once the government is free of corruption, there is economic prosperity and people have their needs met, the siren song of socialism tickles the ears of the people. Socialists will claim there is so much wealth it should be redistributed to those who need from those who have. The idea sounds great to those who want, but believe they need, so they will throw the gates open for the Trojan horse. Socialists appeal to our envy, feed our greed and fill our bellies with hate. The call for a more equitable distribution of the goods of society grows in volume and intensity until socialists get elected. The claim is that it will work this time because we have the “right” leaders. Socialists rely on the lazy, ignorant and foolish to gain power. Since free market politicians have as their core value, liberty, they allow free and fair elections, and so another experiment in socialism is started. One that will fail, like all the others, resulting in a diminished standard of living for everyone but the elite.

The cycle of socialism/capitalism is as destructive as cancer, unfortunately, human nature prevents us from treating the disease, as well as the constant drumbeat of propaganda from the media, that calls itself unbiased. Such a cycle is impossible to break as long as those who are in love with socialism control the government monopoly school system, the media, our universities, media, the legal sector and big business. That is why the new class so stridently oppose any reform of education like the voucher system, such reform would take thousands of children away from their indoctrinating centers, give them good educations and enable children educated in such a system, to engage in the market system. The results would undermine the cycle and therefore cannot be allowed. The results would feed back, and more people would seek economic improvement within the free market framework, laughing at the lies of the socialists. In short, the power of the new class must be reduced, and since that is nearly impossible, the cycle will go on. I call dibs on that slice of half eaten moldy bread, maybe I can even find some rancid butter to put on it…

Sincerely,

John Pepin

INCAP Rule #1 of Acquisition.

Thursday, June 2nd, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if I were to write the International Capitalist Party’s Rules of acquisition, as opposed to the Star Trek, Ferengi rules of acquisition, my first rule would be, “Provide a better quality product at a better price point than your competitors…” If every business venture followed this advice instead of the new class version, “Stop competition through bought and paid for government intervention…” Which would be the Ferengi version as well. The first leads to ever better products, made at higher relative wages, with more money returned to shareholders, to invest in more businesses creating growing economy. The second leads to the situation we have today, where the pay for upper management exceeds the amount given to all the shareholders combined, while the employees are squeezed as hard as possible, turning out as defective as law will allow products, all to feed the voracious appetite of the new class, that run our industries today with their new class Ferengi rules of acquisition…

At the root of any rules of acquisition is the presumption that if the players adhere to the rules they will become wealthy. Wealth however can only really grow when the aggregate stock of value goes up. So all the players would, in the end and on average, turn out better than before. To have a system where the aggregate stock of value is corroded over time, only to feed an oligarchy, can only lead to societal disruption, increasing want and violence, as everyone scrambles to get a larger portion of a shrinking pie. Of course as the pie shrinks the more frantic people will become. Eventually, the pie will shrink to such an extent the promises made by government can no longer be met, and wide scale starvation must ensue. As those who have become utterly dependent on government and have no ability to engage in the market system, become hungry, they can only resort to violence.

Many people have a twisted view of the market system because of the egoistic and self serving nature of the new class. People look at the obvious corruption and cronyism and recoil. Where cronyism has been nurtured by the new class society has become striated. There are the haves and the have nots, the haves will always have and the have nots will never have, because government is exploited by the haves to maintain the status quo. This creates a people who are jaded to the market system and confuse free markets with crony capitalism. Which in the end also benefits the new class.

The more angry people get at the status quo the more they will empower government to make everyone equal. Of course they are just feeding the monster. The more power the people invest in government, out of ignorance and anger, the more the new class can exploit that power for their own good, to the detriment of everyone else. Calls for socialism always comes from the top of the new class, as a means to fix the problems they have created, by their selfish and greedy actions. Every communist revolution has been started this way, started and run by egg headed intellectuals, who have no suitable skills to sell in the marketplace, with the peasants, who have been barred from the marketplace by social status, making up the soldiers.

A market system is a structure in which people come together to get their needs met. When a market is truly open and free, companies that sell the best quality products at the lowest price point succeed, and those who sell defective products fail. However, in the system we have now, where those who have large businesses face competition from a new competitor, the new class that almost always run the businesses, go to their bought and paid for politicians through their lobbyists to pass regulations crushing that competition. It is far easier to stifle competition in this manner than to improve one’s product and lower the price. A free market provides ever increasing quality, diversity of products and meets new demands while rewarding employees, shareholders and entrepreneurs.

Yes, the Star Trek Ferengi are fictional. They were created to point out how evil the free market is if left unchecked by government regulation. The premise is that government is always virtuous and businesses are always evil. Such nonsense flies in the face of history and human nature. The new class however who write shows like Star Trek cannot help but put in their inculcated biases and prejudices. If people are so corrupt they cannot be trusted with free markets, then how much more dangerous if given absolute power, backed by arbitrary rule? What is really traded on a free market is value, in a crony market, what is traded is power.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

America’s Single Party System

Thursday, April 28th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, elections only mean anything if there is a real choice. Not a beauty contest between two people who have the exact same views, platforms and plans, but a choice between two or more ideologies of government, economics and governance. Today, the progressives have managed to ensure that we never get a real choice about the future of our nations, our economic system or whether or not our leaders will follow our Constitution. Every election since Reagan has been between a progressive republican and a progressive democrat. No matter who wins, progressivism, and thereby Marxism, has won. Today is no different. With the near coronation of Donald Trump the republicans have picked their progressive and no matter who wins the democrat nomination they will have theirs very soon. So yet again we will have a choice, between a progressive and a progressive. Just like the old Soviet Union, Iran and many other autocracies. The people are given a false choice.

The United States was founded on libertarian principles. The founders, especially the anti constitutionalists, sought a government system that limited the people the least while limiting government the most. They set up a government that would allow the people to do pretty much as we see fit, limiting government in it’s ability to control us. The constitutional debate was about how to limit government’s power, how to control the tendencies of the elite to abuse power, how to ensure the people have the upper hand and how to limit the power of faction. The founders believed in liberty, a word that has been vanquished from our lexicon today. When was the last time you heard a politician say the word, “liberty?” Most of what we accept as lawful in our government would send the founders of our nation into conniption fits of rage and disappointment.

Libertarians are barred from the table of power. The new class uses a plethora of means to keep anyone who believes in liberty from the reigns of power. Libertarians are labeled with every derogatory meme that can be brought to bear. Since the new class controls the narrative there is never any effective push back even from the most absurd and spurious claims. Any politician who come anywhere near believing in the constitutional limits of government is seen as a threat to the established order. An order of autocracy veiled in peace, control hidden in protection and Marxism obscured by compassion. Reagan was the closest politician to our founding principles elected since Calvin Coolidge and he was hated to the extreme by the elite even today.

Romney typified the progressive republican. During the debates with Obama Romney couldn’t agree enough with Obama’s usurpations. Romney was full of compassion for the poor, he sought peace through strength and protection by control. In every election we are told this or that politician is “unelectable” because they believe in America and our founding principles. Of course the new class elite don’t use those words but that is exactly what they mean. Any politician who believes in limited government is destroyed by the new class controlled media, defamed by the political establishment as fringe, cursed on social media for not dropping out of the race, made a laughing stock by the culture and charged with whatever spurious claim that can be made up. The entirety of our society, government and culture attack any libertarian who seeks office.

This next election will be the same. The libertarian Cruz has finally been vanquished and Trump has all but won. Trump is a progressive zealot and has been his entire life. He supports every progressive policy, usurpation and regulation. He has helped fund the cultural Marxism that is polluting our culture and society like so much raw sewage. Trump has not only supported every progressive cause and politician but has given freely of his own money to promote them. Moreover, Trump has slopped at the trough of government cronyism. Since it is all but confirmed, the republicans will put up the uber progressive Trump, calling him a “conservative.” Hillary Clinton has admitted she is a progressive and Bernie Sanders is a Soviet style Marxist. The monikers the media place on them have as much to do with reality as Star Wars does space travel. Both are fiction designed to entertain and enrich the elite. So I wonder, which progressive are you going to vote for… The crony capitalist, the utterly corrupt woman or the outright Marxist?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Violence as a Means to Control Followers

Sunday, April 24th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if your ideas mush be enforced with violence, those who leave your sect must be killed and you spread your ideology through conquest, you must have self esteem issues. Confident people, institutions and groups know in their hearts that their ideas are true and virtuous, therefore they allow people to come and go, spread their ideas through discussion and hold onto followers by the power of love and logic, not violence and threats. Groups, institutions and people who have self esteem issues however, are very different. Factions with self esteem issues know in their hearts their ideology is wrong and understand in their heads that no rational person would follow them without being coerced. Moreover, those factions, institutions, groups and sects that have self esteem issues can be reliably singled out by their treatment of dissidents, unbelievers and those who wish to leave the fold. The reason this simple concept is so important for humanity to learn, and never forget, is that violence is the means in which an evil, backwards, pernicious and stunting ideas pervade mankind.

This concept need not be manifested in outright violence, other forms of coercion work as well. Political correctness is another form of violence that demands unanimity of thought, knuckling under of unbelievers and advances the ideology of progressivism through fear and intimidation. Progressives know, because history is unambiguous about this, that their ideology is wrong. They know if their ideas were fully implemented, world wide government, world communism and world tyranny, the lot of mankind would suffer greatly. The results of their ideas is irrelevant to them, the goal is all that is important, and so the means can be anything that works.

Violence in all it’s forms… soft, personal, impersonal, vague, bloody or against one’s reputation, are ways to force someone else to do something they would otherwise not do. Since someone must be forced to do something believe something or think something, they would otherwise not do, that is further proof that the action, belief or thought is not in the self interest of the individual, but of the egoist forcing the point. We do things, believe things and think things that are in some way in our self interest. Human beings are universal about this. Even the most psychotically challenged among us act in their own perceived self interest.

Self interest however come in several flavors. Self interest can be rightly understood, it can be egoistic and it can selfless. Self interest rightly understood is to follow one’s self interest in an enlightened manner, sadly, self interest rightly understood is becoming more and more rare today. Selfless self interest is what saints practice. Jesus practiced self interest selflessly. An egoist follows his or her self interest selfishly. Egoists are the ones who will use violence against others to force those others to act, believe and think, that which is against their own self interest, regardless of it’s flavor. The egoist will demand from others that which the egoist would never subject himself to. Therefore all ideologies, movements, institutions and religions that use violence to force submission, come from egoism, are perpetuated with egoistic drives and eventually are quashed in bloody upheaval.

All ideologies that spread through fear, maintain their adherents with intimidation and subject others to threats, are wrong ideologies. What the egoists that run such ideologies fail to understand is that the tighter they hold their adherents the more the adherents seek to escape. Violence only goes so far. In the greater scheme of things, it is human heartedness, (logic and love), that always eventually wins out. Yes the egoist can lower humanity for a while, sometimes centuries and even possibly millennia, but eventually, human heartedness will win out. Because people are attracted to beauty and repulsed by evil. Violence can hold a person in evil for awhile but the evil that underlies the violence, the reason that violence must be applied, the revulsion people will eventually feel at the evil they are forced to embrace will become so strong even the threat of death itself will hold no power. That is when false, evil and pernicious ideologies that use violence to hold their adherents, pull in new followers and force unanimity of thought, collapse in bloody upheaval.

Sincerely,

John Pepin